| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <12511146.O9o76ZdvQC@natalenko.name>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2024 23:18:58 +0200
From: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@...alenko.name>
To: peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com, acme@...nel.org,
namhyung@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, jolsa@...nel.org, irogers@...gle.com,
adrian.hunter@...el.com, kan.liang@...ux.intel.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com,
rui.zhang@...el.com, Dhananjay Ugwekar <Dhananjay.Ugwekar@....com>
Cc: eranian@...gle.com, gautham.shenoy@....com, ravi.bangoria@....com,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Dhananjay Ugwekar <Dhananjay.Ugwekar@....com>
Subject:
Re: [PATCH v5 0/9] Add per-core RAPL energy counter support for AMD CPUs
Hello.
On pátek 13. září 2024 17:21:40, SELČ Dhananjay Ugwekar wrote:
> Currently the energy-cores event in the power PMU aggregates energy
> consumption data at a package level. On the other hand the core energy
> RAPL counter in AMD CPUs has a core scope (which means the energy
> consumption is recorded separately for each core). Earlier efforts to add
> the core event in the power PMU had failed [1], due to the difference in
> the scope of these two events. Hence, there is a need for a new core scope
> PMU.
>
> This patchset adds a new "power_per_core" PMU alongside the existing
> "power" PMU, which will be responsible for collecting the new
> "energy-per-core" event.
>
> Tested the package level and core level PMU counters with workloads
> pinned to different CPUs.
>
> Results with workload pinned to CPU 1 in Core 1 on an AMD Zen4 Genoa
> machine:
>
> $ perf stat -a --per-core -e power_per_core/energy-per-core/ -- sleep 1
>
> Performance counter stats for 'system wide':
>
> S0-D0-C0 1 0.02 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C1 1 5.72 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C2 1 0.02 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C3 1 0.02 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C4 1 0.02 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C5 1 0.02 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C6 1 0.02 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C7 1 0.02 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C8 1 0.02 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C9 1 0.02 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C10 1 0.02 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
>
> v4 Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240711102436.4432-1-Dhananjay.Ugwekar@amd.com/
>
> v5 changes:
> * Rebase on top of Kan Liang's "PMU scope" patchset [2]
> * rapl_cntr_mask moved to rapl_pmus struct in patch 8
> * Patch 1 from v4 is merged separately, so removed from this series
> * Add an extra argument "scope" in patch 5 to the init functions
> * Add an new patch 2, which removes the cpu_to_rapl_pmu() function
>
> Base: tip/perf/core(currently has just 1-5 patches from [2]) + patch 6 from [2] +
> diff [3] + patch 7 from [2] + revert [4] + apply [5]
>
> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/3e766f0e-37d4-0f82-3868-31b14228868d@linux.intel.com/
> [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240802151643.1691631-1-kan.liang@linux.intel.com/
> [3]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/8c09633c-5bf2-48a2-91a6-a0af9b9f2e8c@linux.intel.com/
> [4]: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git/commit/?h=perf/core&id=8d72eba1cf8cecd76a2b4c1dd7673c2dc775f514
> [5]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240910085504.204814-1-Dhananjay.Ugwekar@amd.com/
>
> Dhananjay Ugwekar (8):
> perf/x86/rapl: Remove the cpu_to_rapl_pmu() function
> perf/x86/rapl: Rename rapl_pmu variables
> perf/x86/rapl: Make rapl_model struct global
> perf/x86/rapl: Add arguments to the cleanup and init functions
> perf/x86/rapl: Modify the generic variable names to *_pkg*
> perf/x86/rapl: Remove the global variable rapl_msrs
> perf/x86/rapl: Move the cntr_mask to rapl_pmus struct
> perf/x86/rapl: Add per-core energy counter support for AMD CPUs
>
> K Prateek Nayak (1):
> x86/topology: Introduce topology_logical_core_id()
>
> Documentation/arch/x86/topology.rst | 4 +
> arch/x86/events/rapl.c | 406 ++++++++++++++++----------
> arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h | 1 +
> arch/x86/include/asm/topology.h | 1 +
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/debugfs.c | 1 +
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/topology_common.c | 1 +
> 6 files changed, 266 insertions(+), 148 deletions(-)
With v6.11-rc7 + all the mentioned preparatory patches and this series:
$ taskset -c 9 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/null &
$ sudo perf stat -a --per-core -e power_per_core/energy-per-core/ sleep 5
Performance counter stats for 'system wide':
S0-D0-C0 1 3,79 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C1 1 5,65 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C2 1 1,26 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C3 1 3,18 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C4 1 2,06 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C5 1 3,51 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C6 1 0,77 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C7 1 0,55 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C8 1 1,65 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C9 1 47,85 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C10 1 2,49 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C11 1 11,85 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C12 1 1,75 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C13 1 0,74 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C14 1 2,58 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C15 1 4,67 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
5,003391425 seconds time elapsed
on the following CPU:
AMD Ryzen 9 5950X 16-Core Processor
If this behaves as expected, please add:
Tested-by: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@...alenko.name>
Thank you.
--
Oleksandr Natalenko (post-factum)
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists